Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
Pattern, by AE Reiff

If I a pattern of the universe divine,
See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
[...]

https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html

On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>
> Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
> Pattern, by AE Reiff
>
> If I a pattern of the universe divine,
> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
> [...]
>
> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html

Another good one from AE Reiff....

On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
> Pattern, by AE Reiff
>
> If I a pattern of the universe divine,
> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
> [...]
>
> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html

Pattern

> If I[,] a pattern of the universe divine,

if the speaker is "a pattern of the universe," one assume he is referring to his molecular structure (i.e., a quasi-scientific perception), but he follows this with an anachronistically inverted "divine" (without the capital "D" to make it even more confusing. The sentiment appears to be a New Agey take on Pantheism wherein atoms, molecules, strings, etc., are part of humankind and the universe they inhabit. All is One/all are united in a single consciousness which, for want of a better word, we term "God."

This is basically what I believe, but I like to think that I can express it in a clearer fashion.

> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,

Isn't most light luminous by definition?

> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind,

Does the speaker hear the wind's song thundering in his heart and mind, or does he hear the wind's song *and* thunder in heart and mind? If the former, he needs to delete the comma. If the latter, he needs to replace the comma with a semicolon.

> That these portend symbols of universal might,

His run-on sentence loses coherence as it progresses. Does the thunder in his heart portend [sic] symbols of universal might? Or do the stars' luminosity and the wind's song portend[sic] universal might? And why should universal might trigger warnings of calamity or ill omens?"

> Then I consider first their means of union,

I think that the meaning of this run-on monstrosity is something along the following lines: When I am dwarfed by the vastness of the universe, and the wind's song stirs the thunder in my soul, I remind myself everything I see is intricately connected in the Divine tapestry of creation.

Or, as Don McLean put it:

"Every dawn that breaks golden is held in suspension
Like the yoke of the egg in albumen.
Where the birth and the death of unseen generations
Are interdependent in vast orchestration
And painted in colors of tapestry thread
When the dying are born and the living are dead."

> The balance of beauty with power and force,
> What adherence!

A commercial for Krazy Glue?

> God seems like a woman,
> Holds together his family of atoms from wars.

I would have preferred to have God actually *be* a woman rather than a transvestite.

> Out far within deep the reach of dark space,

Come on, George, you're supposed to be editing these things. It's obvious that this clichéd line was intended to read as follows: "Out far within the deep reach of dark space,". It's still cringe-inducing, mind you, but at least it's no longer gibberish.

"Far within the sunless depths of space" would have been much better.

> He acts on this pattern of union for earth,

How does one act on a pattern? God would either follow an already existing pattern (implying the existence of a greater power: an Übergott), or God would set/create the pattern.

I also think that the author meant to say that God set the pattern for *unity* in earth. "Union," especially in conjunction with "acts," seems to imply that God copulates with earth in a ritualistic manner (role-playing?). However, based on the remainder of the poem, this may well have been the author's intent.

> When he marries, he is husband and spouse,

Um... a husband *is* a spouse. I think that the poet means to say "husband and wife" (perhaps he's unaware that "spouse" is gender neutral?).

> Birth his great mystery, creation of life,

The poet seems to naturally fall into run-on sentences comprising thought strings -- nowhere near as bad as our resident Donkey's strings of thought fragments -- but, as editor, you should replace the commas after "mystery" and "life" with a semicolon and a period, respectively.

> So while he acts as our father and mother,
> All along we knew him as our lover.

The above passages is disturbingly incestuous (Pickles would have approved) and blasphemous (earning it Pendragon's seal of approval).

On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:54:32 PM UTC, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
> > Pattern, by AE Reiff
> >
> > If I a pattern of the universe divine,
> > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
> > [...]
> >
> > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
We wish to point out that George Dance states (on his blog) that this poem is from "The True Light That Lights." It is not included in Mr. Reiff's chapbook (23 pages) by that name.

> Pattern
>
> > If I[,] a pattern of the universe divine,
>
> if the speaker is "a pattern of the universe," one assume he is referring to his molecular structure (i.e., a quasi-scientific perception), but he follows this with an anachronistically inverted "divine" (without the capital "D" to make it even more confusing. The sentiment appears to be a New Agey take on Pantheism wherein atoms, molecules, strings, etc., are part of humankind and the universe they inhabit. All is One/all are united in a single consciousness which, for want of a better word, we term "God."
We assumed too that the author left out "am" in the first line. However, it is still a murky statement, since is he a pattern "for" the universe, meaning that everything is copied from him and he is the original? Or, does he mean that he is cut from the original pattern of the universe? Or, maybe he just needs a comma after "I?"
>
> This is basically what I believe, but I like to think that I can express it in a clearer fashion.
> > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> Isn't most light luminous by definition?
We think that the author really means stars and "planets." Sloppy, sloppy of the author and the editor.

>
> > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind,
>
> Does the speaker hear the wind's song thundering in his heart and mind, or does he hear the wind's song *and* thunder in heart and mind? If the former, he needs to delete the comma. If the latter, he needs to replace the comma with a semicolon.
Maybe he hears the wind's song and then "he" thunders in his heart and mind?

>
> > That these portend symbols of universal might,
>
> His run-on sentence loses coherence as it progresses. Does the thunder in his heart portend [sic] symbols of universal might? Or do the stars' luminosity and the wind's song portend[sic] universal might? And why should universal might trigger warnings of calamity or ill omens?"
We think that Mr. Reiff was trying (and failing) to write something profound.

>
> > Then I consider first their means of union,
>
> I think that the meaning of this run-on monstrosity is something along the following lines: When I am dwarfed by the vastness of the universe, and the wind's song stirs the thunder in my soul, I remind myself everything I see is intricately connected in the Divine tapestry of creation.

Or, maybe that he is a McCall's dress pattern?
>
> Or, as Don McLean put it:
>
> "Every dawn that breaks golden is held in suspension
> Like the yoke of the egg in albumen.
> Where the birth and the death of unseen generations
> Are interdependent in vast orchestration
> And painted in colors of tapestry thread
> When the dying are born and the living are dead."
>
> > The balance of beauty with power and force,
> > What adherence!
>
> A commercial for Krazy Glue?
Cut on the lines and baste before you sew. ("Measure twice, cut once.")
>
> > God seems like a woman,
> > Holds together his family of atoms from wars.
>
> I would have preferred to have God actually *be* a woman rather than a transvestite.
He feels like a woman (à la Shania Twain).
>
> > Out far within deep the reach of dark space,
>
> Come on, George, you're supposed to be editing these things. It's obvious that this clichéd line was intended to read as follows: "Out far within the deep reach of dark space,". It's still cringe-inducing, mind you, but at least it's no longer gibberish.
>
> "Far within the sunless depths of space" would have been much better.
All the withins and withouts and fars and wides make no sense. They might as well be Jordy's Uncle's emojis.
>
> > He acts on this pattern of union for earth,
>
> How does one act on a pattern? God would either follow an already existing pattern (implying the existence of a greater power: an Übergott), or God would set/create the pattern.
The author states in the beginning lines that he IS the pattern.
>
> I also think that the author meant to say that God set the pattern for *unity* in earth. "Union," especially in conjunction with "acts," seems to imply that God copulates with earth in a ritualistic manner (role-playing?). However, based on the remainder of the poem, this may well have been the author's intent.
According to the lines, there is nothing out there but the Earth. What about all of the other solar systems that the James Webb Space Telescope is imaging? Is God busy with a pattern for those too, or is He using the master pattern that He created of the author?
>
> > When he marries, he is husband and spouse,
>
> Um... a husband *is* a spouse. I think that the poet means to say "husband and wife" (perhaps he's unaware that "spouse" is gender neutral?).
Maybe He is one of the people who marry themselves? Not sure how you would divorce yourself, though. Also, the "he's" should be "He's."
>
> > Birth his great mystery, creation of life,
>
> The poet seems to naturally fall into run-on sentences comprising thought strings -- nowhere near as bad as our resident Donkey's strings of thought fragments -- but, as editor, you should replace the commas after "mystery" and "life" with a semicolon and a period, respectively.
The "his" should be "His."
>
> > So while he acts as our father and mother,
> > All along we knew him as our lover.
>
> The above passages is disturbingly incestuous (Pickles would have approved) and blasphemous (earning it Pendragon's seal of approval).
In this line, "him" should be "Him." Yes, Pickles would be delighted.

Since this is supposed to be a part of the "Parousia Christian Poetry Chapbook" series, we are surprised that Mr. Reiff was not more careful with his religious grammar and punctuation. When we read the poem, we thought that he did not go back and revise it, let alone proofread it. The poem has a careless feel.

NancyGene wrote:

> On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:54:32 PM UTC, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> > Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
>> > Pattern, by AE Reiff
>> >
>> > If I a pattern of the universe divine,
>> > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
>> > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
>> > [...]
>> >
>> > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
> We wish to point out that George Dance states (on his blog) that this poem is from "The True Light That Lights." It is not included in Mr. Reiff's chapbook (23 pages) by that name.

OK good to know

On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 9:24:57 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
> On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:54:32 PM UTC, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
> > > Pattern, by AE Reiff
> > >
> > > If I a pattern of the universe divine,
> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
> We wish to point out that George Dance states (on his blog) that this poem is from "The True Light That Lights." It is not included in Mr. Reiff's chapbook (23 pages) by that name.
> > Pattern
> >
> > > If I[,] a pattern of the universe divine,
> >
> > if the speaker is "a pattern of the universe," one assume he is referring to his molecular structure (i.e., a quasi-scientific perception), but he follows this with an anachronistically inverted "divine" (without the capital "D" to make it even more confusing. The sentiment appears to be a New Agey take on Pantheism wherein atoms, molecules, strings, etc., are part of humankind and the universe they inhabit. All is One/all are united in a single consciousness which, for want of a better word, we term "God."
> We assumed too that the author left out "am" in the first line. However, it is still a murky statement, since is he a pattern "for" the universe, meaning that everything is copied from him and he is the original? Or, does he mean that he is cut from the original pattern of the universe? Or, maybe he just needs a comma after "I?"
> >
> > This is basically what I believe, but I like to think that I can express it in a clearer fashion.
> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> > Isn't most light luminous by definition?
> We think that the author really means stars and "planets." Sloppy, sloppy of the author and the editor.
> >
> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind,
> >
> > Does the speaker hear the wind's song thundering in his heart and mind, or does he hear the wind's song *and* thunder in heart and mind? If the former, he needs to delete the comma. If the latter, he needs to replace the comma with a semicolon.
> Maybe he hears the wind's song and then "he" thunders in his heart and mind?
> >
> > > That these portend symbols of universal might,
> >
> > His run-on sentence loses coherence as it progresses. Does the thunder in his heart portend [sic] symbols of universal might? Or do the stars' luminosity and the wind's song portend[sic] universal might? And why should universal might trigger warnings of calamity or ill omens?"
> We think that Mr. Reiff was trying (and failing) to write something profound.
> >
> > > Then I consider first their means of union,
> >
> > I think that the meaning of this run-on monstrosity is something along the following lines: When I am dwarfed by the vastness of the universe, and the wind's song stirs the thunder in my soul, I remind myself everything I see is intricately connected in the Divine tapestry of creation.
> Or, maybe that he is a McCall's dress pattern?
> >
> > Or, as Don McLean put it:
> >
> > "Every dawn that breaks golden is held in suspension
> > Like the yoke of the egg in albumen.
> > Where the birth and the death of unseen generations
> > Are interdependent in vast orchestration
> > And painted in colors of tapestry thread
> > When the dying are born and the living are dead."
> >
> > > The balance of beauty with power and force,
> > > What adherence!
> >
> > A commercial for Krazy Glue?
> Cut on the lines and baste before you sew. ("Measure twice, cut once.")
> >
> > > God seems like a woman,
> > > Holds together his family of atoms from wars.
> >
> > I would have preferred to have God actually *be* a woman rather than a transvestite.
> He feels like a woman (à la Shania Twain).
> >
> > > Out far within deep the reach of dark space,
> >
> > Come on, George, you're supposed to be editing these things. It's obvious that this clichéd line was intended to read as follows: "Out far within the deep reach of dark space,". It's still cringe-inducing, mind you, but at least it's no longer gibberish.
> >
> > "Far within the sunless depths of space" would have been much better.
> All the withins and withouts and fars and wides make no sense. They might as well be Jordy's Uncle's emojis.
> >
> > > He acts on this pattern of union for earth,
> >
> > How does one act on a pattern? God would either follow an already existing pattern (implying the existence of a greater power: an Übergott), or God would set/create the pattern.
> The author states in the beginning lines that he IS the pattern.
> >
> > I also think that the author meant to say that God set the pattern for *unity* in earth. "Union," especially in conjunction with "acts," seems to imply that God copulates with earth in a ritualistic manner (role-playing?).. However, based on the remainder of the poem, this may well have been the author's intent.
> According to the lines, there is nothing out there but the Earth. What about all of the other solar systems that the James Webb Space Telescope is imaging? Is God busy with a pattern for those too, or is He using the master pattern that He created of the author?
> >
> > > When he marries, he is husband and spouse,
> >
> > Um... a husband *is* a spouse. I think that the poet means to say "husband and wife" (perhaps he's unaware that "spouse" is gender neutral?).
> Maybe He is one of the people who marry themselves? Not sure how you would divorce yourself, though. Also, the "he's" should be "He's."
> >
> > > Birth his great mystery, creation of life,
> >
> > The poet seems to naturally fall into run-on sentences comprising thought strings -- nowhere near as bad as our resident Donkey's strings of thought fragments -- but, as editor, you should replace the commas after "mystery" and "life" with a semicolon and a period, respectively.
> The "his" should be "His."
> >
> > > So while he acts as our father and mother,
> > > All along we knew him as our lover.
> >
> > The above passages is disturbingly incestuous (Pickles would have approved) and blasphemous (earning it Pendragon's seal of approval).
> In this line, "him" should be "Him." Yes, Pickles would be delighted.
>
> Since this is supposed to be a part of the "Parousia Christian Poetry Chapbook" series, we are surprised that Mr. Reiff was not more careful with his religious grammar and punctuation. When we read the poem, we thought that he did not go back and revise it, let alone proofread it. The poem has a careless feel.
George Dance, George Sulzbach pissed on this thread and then sent it to the deep. Do you have any comments about our and Michael's comments?

NancyGene wrote:

> On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 9:24:57 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
>> On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:54:32 PM UTC, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
>
>> > > Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
>> > > Pattern, by AE Reiff
>> > >
>> > > If I a pattern of the universe divine,
>> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
>> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
>> > > [...]
>> > >
>> > > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
>> We wish to point out that George Dance states (on his blog) that this poem is from "The True Light That Lights." It is not included in Mr. Reiff's chapbook (23 pages) by that name.
>> > Pattern
>> >
>> > > If I[,] a pattern of the universe divine,
>> >
>> > if the speaker is "a pattern of the universe," one assume he is referring to his molecular structure (i.e., a quasi-scientific perception), but he follows this with an anachronistically inverted "divine" (without the capital "D" to make it even more confusing. The sentiment appears to be a New Agey take on Pantheism wherein atoms, molecules, strings, etc., are part of humankind and the universe they inhabit. All is One/all are united in a single consciousness which, for want of a better word, we term "God."
>> We assumed too that the author left out "am" in the first line. However, it is still a murky statement, since is he a pattern "for" the universe, meaning that everything is copied from him and he is the original? Or, does he mean that he is cut from the original pattern of the universe? Or, maybe he just needs a comma after "I?"
>> >
>> > This is basically what I believe, but I like to think that I can express it in a clearer fashion.
>> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
>> > Isn't most light luminous by definition?
>> We think that the author really means stars and "planets." Sloppy, sloppy of the author and the editor.
>> >
>> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind,
>> >
>> > Does the speaker hear the wind's song thundering in his heart and mind, or does he hear the wind's song *and* thunder in heart and mind? If the former, he needs to delete the comma. If the latter, he needs to replace the comma with a semicolon.
>> Maybe he hears the wind's song and then "he" thunders in his heart and mind?
>> >
>> > > That these portend symbols of universal might,
>> >
>> > His run-on sentence loses coherence as it progresses. Does the thunder in his heart portend [sic] symbols of universal might? Or do the stars' luminosity and the wind's song portend[sic] universal might? And why should universal might trigger warnings of calamity or ill omens?"
>> We think that Mr. Reiff was trying (and failing) to write something profound.
>> >
>> > > Then I consider first their means of union,
>> >
>> > I think that the meaning of this run-on monstrosity is something along the following lines: When I am dwarfed by the vastness of the universe, and the wind's song stirs the thunder in my soul, I remind myself everything I see is intricately connected in the Divine tapestry of creation.
>> Or, maybe that he is a McCall's dress pattern?
>> >
>> > Or, as Don McLean put it:
>> >
>> > "Every dawn that breaks golden is held in suspension
>> > Like the yoke of the egg in albumen.
>> > Where the birth and the death of unseen generations
>> > Are interdependent in vast orchestration
>> > And painted in colors of tapestry thread
>> > When the dying are born and the living are dead."
>> >
>> > > The balance of beauty with power and force,
>> > > What adherence!
>> >
>> > A commercial for Krazy Glue?
>> Cut on the lines and baste before you sew. ("Measure twice, cut once.")
>> >
>> > > God seems like a woman,
>> > > Holds together his family of atoms from wars.
>> >
>> > I would have preferred to have God actually *be* a woman rather than a transvestite.
>> He feels like a woman (à la Shania Twain).
>> >
>> > > Out far within deep the reach of dark space,
>> >
>> > Come on, George, you're supposed to be editing these things. It's obvious that this clichéd line was intended to read as follows: "Out far within the deep reach of dark space,". It's still cringe-inducing, mind you, but at least it's no longer gibberish.
>> >
>> > "Far within the sunless depths of space" would have been much better.
>> All the withins and withouts and fars and wides make no sense. They might as well be Jordy's Uncle's emojis.
>> >
>> > > He acts on this pattern of union for earth,
>> >
>> > How does one act on a pattern? God would either follow an already existing pattern (implying the existence of a greater power: an Übergott), or God would set/create the pattern.
>> The author states in the beginning lines that he IS the pattern.
>> >
>> > I also think that the author meant to say that God set the pattern for *unity* in earth. "Union," especially in conjunction with "acts," seems to imply that God copulates with earth in a ritualistic manner (role-playing?).. However, based on the remainder of the poem, this may well have been the author's intent.
>> According to the lines, there is nothing out there but the Earth. What about all of the other solar systems that the James Webb Space Telescope is imaging? Is God busy with a pattern for those too, or is He using the master pattern that He created of the author?
>> >
>> > > When he marries, he is husband and spouse,
>> >
>> > Um... a husband *is* a spouse. I think that the poet means to say "husband and wife" (perhaps he's unaware that "spouse" is gender neutral?).
>> Maybe He is one of the people who marry themselves? Not sure how you would divorce yourself, though. Also, the "he's" should be "He's."
>> >
>> > > Birth his great mystery, creation of life,
>> >
>> > The poet seems to naturally fall into run-on sentences comprising thought strings -- nowhere near as bad as our resident Donkey's strings of thought fragments -- but, as editor, you should replace the commas after "mystery" and "life" with a semicolon and a period, respectively.
>> The "his" should be "His."
>> >
>> > > So while he acts as our father and mother,
>> > > All along we knew him as our lover.
>> >
>> > The above passages is disturbingly incestuous (Pickles would have approved) and blasphemous (earning it Pendragon's seal of approval).
>> In this line, "him" should be "Him." Yes, Pickles would be delighted.
>>
>> Since this is supposed to be a part of the "Parousia Christian Poetry Chapbook" series, we are surprised that Mr. Reiff was not more careful with his religious grammar and punctuation. When we read the poem, we thought that he did not go back and revise it, let alone proofread it. The poem has a careless feel.
>
> George Dance, George Sulzbach pissed xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx

What happened to you pretending not to read Zod's posts?

Bullshit much, Nancy Gene?

🙂

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 12:36:23 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> NancyGene wrote:
>
> > On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 9:24:57 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
> >> On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:54:32 PM UTC, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> > On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> >
> >> > > Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
> >> > > Pattern, by AE Reiff
> >> > >
> >> > > If I a pattern of the universe divine,
> >> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> >> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
> >> > > [...]
> >> > >
> >> > > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
> >> We wish to point out that George Dance states (on his blog) that this poem is from "The True Light That Lights." It is not included in Mr. Reiff's chapbook (23 pages) by that name.
> >> > Pattern
> >> >
> >> > > If I[,] a pattern of the universe divine,
> >> >
> >> > if the speaker is "a pattern of the universe," one assume he is referring to his molecular structure (i.e., a quasi-scientific perception), but he follows this with an anachronistically inverted "divine" (without the capital "D" to make it even more confusing. The sentiment appears to be a New Agey take on Pantheism wherein atoms, molecules, strings, etc., are part of humankind and the universe they inhabit. All is One/all are united in a single consciousness which, for want of a better word, we term "God."
> >> We assumed too that the author left out "am" in the first line. However, it is still a murky statement, since is he a pattern "for" the universe, meaning that everything is copied from him and he is the original? Or, does he mean that he is cut from the original pattern of the universe? Or, maybe he just needs a comma after "I?"
> >> >
> >> > This is basically what I believe, but I like to think that I can express it in a clearer fashion.
> >> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> >> > Isn't most light luminous by definition?
> >> We think that the author really means stars and "planets." Sloppy, sloppy of the author and the editor.
> >> >
> >> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind,
> >> >
> >> > Does the speaker hear the wind's song thundering in his heart and mind, or does he hear the wind's song *and* thunder in heart and mind? If the former, he needs to delete the comma. If the latter, he needs to replace the comma with a semicolon.
> >> Maybe he hears the wind's song and then "he" thunders in his heart and mind?
> >> >
> >> > > That these portend symbols of universal might,
> >> >
> >> > His run-on sentence loses coherence as it progresses. Does the thunder in his heart portend [sic] symbols of universal might? Or do the stars' luminosity and the wind's song portend[sic] universal might? And why should universal might trigger warnings of calamity or ill omens?"
> >> We think that Mr. Reiff was trying (and failing) to write something profound.
> >> >
> >> > > Then I consider first their means of union,
> >> >
> >> > I think that the meaning of this run-on monstrosity is something along the following lines: When I am dwarfed by the vastness of the universe, and the wind's song stirs the thunder in my soul, I remind myself everything I see is intricately connected in the Divine tapestry of creation.
> >> Or, maybe that he is a McCall's dress pattern?
> >> >
> >> > Or, as Don McLean put it:
> >> >
> >> > "Every dawn that breaks golden is held in suspension
> >> > Like the yoke of the egg in albumen.
> >> > Where the birth and the death of unseen generations
> >> > Are interdependent in vast orchestration
> >> > And painted in colors of tapestry thread
> >> > When the dying are born and the living are dead."
> >> >
> >> > > The balance of beauty with power and force,
> >> > > What adherence!
> >> >
> >> > A commercial for Krazy Glue?
> >> Cut on the lines and baste before you sew. ("Measure twice, cut once.")
> >> >
> >> > > God seems like a woman,
> >> > > Holds together his family of atoms from wars.
> >> >
> >> > I would have preferred to have God actually *be* a woman rather than a transvestite.
> >> He feels like a woman (à la Shania Twain).
> >> >
> >> > > Out far within deep the reach of dark space,
> >> >
> >> > Come on, George, you're supposed to be editing these things. It's obvious that this clichéd line was intended to read as follows: "Out far within the deep reach of dark space,". It's still cringe-inducing, mind you, but at least it's no longer gibberish.
> >> >
> >> > "Far within the sunless depths of space" would have been much better..
> >> All the withins and withouts and fars and wides make no sense. They might as well be Jordy's Uncle's emojis.
> >> >
> >> > > He acts on this pattern of union for earth,
> >> >
> >> > How does one act on a pattern? God would either follow an already existing pattern (implying the existence of a greater power: an Übergott), or God would set/create the pattern.
> >> The author states in the beginning lines that he IS the pattern.
> >> >
> >> > I also think that the author meant to say that God set the pattern for *unity* in earth. "Union," especially in conjunction with "acts," seems to imply that God copulates with earth in a ritualistic manner (role-playing?).. However, based on the remainder of the poem, this may well have been the author's intent.
> >> According to the lines, there is nothing out there but the Earth. What about all of the other solar systems that the James Webb Space Telescope is imaging? Is God busy with a pattern for those too, or is He using the master pattern that He created of the author?
> >> >
> >> > > When he marries, he is husband and spouse,
> >> >
> >> > Um... a husband *is* a spouse. I think that the poet means to say "husband and wife" (perhaps he's unaware that "spouse" is gender neutral?).
> >> Maybe He is one of the people who marry themselves? Not sure how you would divorce yourself, though. Also, the "he's" should be "He's."
> >> >
> >> > > Birth his great mystery, creation of life,
> >> >
> >> > The poet seems to naturally fall into run-on sentences comprising thought strings -- nowhere near as bad as our resident Donkey's strings of thought fragments -- but, as editor, you should replace the commas after "mystery" and "life" with a semicolon and a period, respectively.
> >> The "his" should be "His."
> >> >
> >> > > So while he acts as our father and mother,
> >> > > All along we knew him as our lover.
> >> >
> >> > The above passages is disturbingly incestuous (Pickles would have approved) and blasphemous (earning it Pendragon's seal of approval).
> >> In this line, "him" should be "Him." Yes, Pickles would be delighted.
> >>
> >> Since this is supposed to be a part of the "Parousia Christian Poetry Chapbook" series, we are surprised that Mr. Reiff was not more careful with his religious grammar and punctuation. When we read the poem, we thought that he did not go back and revise it, let alone proofread it. The poem has a careless feel.
> >
> > George Dance, George Sulzbach pissed xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> What happened to you pretending not to read Zod's posts?
>
> Bullshit much, Nancy Gene?

No, Donkey. Nor do I.

Both NancyGene and responded to George Dance's poem, thereby opening the way for GD to engage in a poetry-related discussion. (That is the point of AAPC, is it not?)

George has failed to respond to either of us, and since all AAPC threads are in immediate danger of getting buried under Donkey flops, we are hoping that he replies before we report/block the thread as spam.

NOTE TO GEORGE: If you have any intention of discussing the poem with either NancyGene or myself, please do so while the thread is still active on our accounts.

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 1:05:08 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 12:36:23 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > NancyGene wrote:
> >
> > > On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 9:24:57 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
> > >> On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:54:32 PM UTC, michaelmalef...@gmail..com wrote:
> > >> > On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> > >
> > >> > > Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
> > >> > > Pattern, by AE Reiff
> > >> > >
> > >> > > If I a pattern of the universe divine,
> > >> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> > >> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
> > >> > > [...]
> > >> > >
> > >> > > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
> > >> We wish to point out that George Dance states (on his blog) that this poem is from "The True Light That Lights." It is not included in Mr. Reiff's chapbook (23 pages) by that name.
> > >> > Pattern
> > >> >
> > >> > > If I[,] a pattern of the universe divine,
> > >> >
> > >> > if the speaker is "a pattern of the universe," one assume he is referring to his molecular structure (i.e., a quasi-scientific perception), but he follows this with an anachronistically inverted "divine" (without the capital "D" to make it even more confusing. The sentiment appears to be a New Agey take on Pantheism wherein atoms, molecules, strings, etc., are part of humankind and the universe they inhabit. All is One/all are united in a single consciousness which, for want of a better word, we term "God."
> > >> We assumed too that the author left out "am" in the first line. However, it is still a murky statement, since is he a pattern "for" the universe, meaning that everything is copied from him and he is the original? Or, does he mean that he is cut from the original pattern of the universe? Or, maybe he just needs a comma after "I?"
> > >> >
> > >> > This is basically what I believe, but I like to think that I can express it in a clearer fashion.
> > >> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> > >> > Isn't most light luminous by definition?
> > >> We think that the author really means stars and "planets." Sloppy, sloppy of the author and the editor.
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind,
> > >> >
> > >> > Does the speaker hear the wind's song thundering in his heart and mind, or does he hear the wind's song *and* thunder in heart and mind? If the former, he needs to delete the comma. If the latter, he needs to replace the comma with a semicolon.
> > >> Maybe he hears the wind's song and then "he" thunders in his heart and mind?
> > >> >
> > >> > > That these portend symbols of universal might,
> > >> >
> > >> > His run-on sentence loses coherence as it progresses. Does the thunder in his heart portend [sic] symbols of universal might? Or do the stars' luminosity and the wind's song portend[sic] universal might? And why should universal might trigger warnings of calamity or ill omens?"
> > >> We think that Mr. Reiff was trying (and failing) to write something profound.
> > >> >
> > >> > > Then I consider first their means of union,
> > >> >
> > >> > I think that the meaning of this run-on monstrosity is something along the following lines: When I am dwarfed by the vastness of the universe, and the wind's song stirs the thunder in my soul, I remind myself everything I see is intricately connected in the Divine tapestry of creation.
> > >> Or, maybe that he is a McCall's dress pattern?
> > >> >
> > >> > Or, as Don McLean put it:
> > >> >
> > >> > "Every dawn that breaks golden is held in suspension
> > >> > Like the yoke of the egg in albumen.
> > >> > Where the birth and the death of unseen generations
> > >> > Are interdependent in vast orchestration
> > >> > And painted in colors of tapestry thread
> > >> > When the dying are born and the living are dead."
> > >> >
> > >> > > The balance of beauty with power and force,
> > >> > > What adherence!
> > >> >
> > >> > A commercial for Krazy Glue?
> > >> Cut on the lines and baste before you sew. ("Measure twice, cut once..")
> > >> >
> > >> > > God seems like a woman,
> > >> > > Holds together his family of atoms from wars.
> > >> >
> > >> > I would have preferred to have God actually *be* a woman rather than a transvestite.
> > >> He feels like a woman (à la Shania Twain).
> > >> >
> > >> > > Out far within deep the reach of dark space,
> > >> >
> > >> > Come on, George, you're supposed to be editing these things. It's obvious that this clichéd line was intended to read as follows: "Out far within the deep reach of dark space,". It's still cringe-inducing, mind you, but at least it's no longer gibberish.
> > >> >
> > >> > "Far within the sunless depths of space" would have been much better.
> > >> All the withins and withouts and fars and wides make no sense. They might as well be Jordy's Uncle's emojis.
> > >> >
> > >> > > He acts on this pattern of union for earth,
> > >> >
> > >> > How does one act on a pattern? God would either follow an already existing pattern (implying the existence of a greater power: an Übergott), or God would set/create the pattern.
> > >> The author states in the beginning lines that he IS the pattern.
> > >> >
> > >> > I also think that the author meant to say that God set the pattern for *unity* in earth. "Union," especially in conjunction with "acts," seems to imply that God copulates with earth in a ritualistic manner (role-playing?).. However, based on the remainder of the poem, this may well have been the author's intent.
> > >> According to the lines, there is nothing out there but the Earth. What about all of the other solar systems that the James Webb Space Telescope is imaging? Is God busy with a pattern for those too, or is He using the master pattern that He created of the author?
> > >> >
> > >> > > When he marries, he is husband and spouse,
> > >> >
> > >> > Um... a husband *is* a spouse. I think that the poet means to say "husband and wife" (perhaps he's unaware that "spouse" is gender neutral?).
> > >> Maybe He is one of the people who marry themselves? Not sure how you would divorce yourself, though. Also, the "he's" should be "He's."
> > >> >
> > >> > > Birth his great mystery, creation of life,
> > >> >
> > >> > The poet seems to naturally fall into run-on sentences comprising thought strings -- nowhere near as bad as our resident Donkey's strings of thought fragments -- but, as editor, you should replace the commas after "mystery" and "life" with a semicolon and a period, respectively.
> > >> The "his" should be "His."
> > >> >
> > >> > > So while he acts as our father and mother,
> > >> > > All along we knew him as our lover.
> > >> >
> > >> > The above passages is disturbingly incestuous (Pickles would have approved) and blasphemous (earning it Pendragon's seal of approval).
> > >> In this line, "him" should be "Him." Yes, Pickles would be delighted..
> > >>
> > >> Since this is supposed to be a part of the "Parousia Christian Poetry Chapbook" series, we are surprised that Mr. Reiff was not more careful with his religious grammar and punctuation. When we read the poem, we thought that he did not go back and revise it, let alone proofread it. The poem has a careless feel.
> > >
> > > George Dance, George Sulzbach pissed xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > What happened to you pretending not to read Zod's posts?
> >
> > Bullshit much, Nancy Gene?
> No

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 1:37:57 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 1:05:08 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 12:36:23 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > NancyGene wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 9:24:57 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
> > > >> On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:54:32 PM UTC, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >> > On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> > > Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
> > > >> > > Pattern, by AE Reiff
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > If I a pattern of the universe divine,
> > > >> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> > > >> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
> > > >> > > [...]
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
> > > >> We wish to point out that George Dance states (on his blog) that this poem is from "The True Light That Lights." It is not included in Mr. Reiff's chapbook (23 pages) by that name.
> > > >> > Pattern
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > If I[,] a pattern of the universe divine,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > if the speaker is "a pattern of the universe," one assume he is referring to his molecular structure (i.e., a quasi-scientific perception), but he follows this with an anachronistically inverted "divine" (without the capital "D" to make it even more confusing. The sentiment appears to be a New Agey take on Pantheism wherein atoms, molecules, strings, etc., are part of humankind and the universe they inhabit. All is One/all are united in a single consciousness which, for want of a better word, we term "God."
> > > >> We assumed too that the author left out "am" in the first line. However, it is still a murky statement, since is he a pattern "for" the universe, meaning that everything is copied from him and he is the original? Or, does he mean that he is cut from the original pattern of the universe? Or, maybe he just needs a comma after "I?"
> > > >> >
> > > >> > This is basically what I believe, but I like to think that I can express it in a clearer fashion.
> > > >> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> > > >> > Isn't most light luminous by definition?
> > > >> We think that the author really means stars and "planets." Sloppy, sloppy of the author and the editor.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Does the speaker hear the wind's song thundering in his heart and mind, or does he hear the wind's song *and* thunder in heart and mind? If the former, he needs to delete the comma. If the latter, he needs to replace the comma with a semicolon.
> > > >> Maybe he hears the wind's song and then "he" thunders in his heart and mind?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > That these portend symbols of universal might,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > His run-on sentence loses coherence as it progresses. Does the thunder in his heart portend [sic] symbols of universal might? Or do the stars' luminosity and the wind's song portend[sic] universal might? And why should universal might trigger warnings of calamity or ill omens?"
> > > >> We think that Mr. Reiff was trying (and failing) to write something profound.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Then I consider first their means of union,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I think that the meaning of this run-on monstrosity is something along the following lines: When I am dwarfed by the vastness of the universe, and the wind's song stirs the thunder in my soul, I remind myself everything I see is intricately connected in the Divine tapestry of creation.
> > > >> Or, maybe that he is a McCall's dress pattern?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Or, as Don McLean put it:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > "Every dawn that breaks golden is held in suspension
> > > >> > Like the yoke of the egg in albumen.
> > > >> > Where the birth and the death of unseen generations
> > > >> > Are interdependent in vast orchestration
> > > >> > And painted in colors of tapestry thread
> > > >> > When the dying are born and the living are dead."
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > The balance of beauty with power and force,
> > > >> > > What adherence!
> > > >> >
> > > >> > A commercial for Krazy Glue?
> > > >> Cut on the lines and baste before you sew. ("Measure twice, cut once.")
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > God seems like a woman,
> > > >> > > Holds together his family of atoms from wars.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I would have preferred to have God actually *be* a woman rather than a transvestite.
> > > >> He feels like a woman (à la Shania Twain).
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Out far within deep the reach of dark space,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Come on, George, you're supposed to be editing these things. It's obvious that this clichéd line was intended to read as follows: "Out far within the deep reach of dark space,". It's still cringe-inducing, mind you, but at least it's no longer gibberish.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > "Far within the sunless depths of space" would have been much better.
> > > >> All the withins and withouts and fars and wides make no sense. They might as well be Jordy's Uncle's emojis.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > He acts on this pattern of union for earth,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > How does one act on a pattern? God would either follow an already existing pattern (implying the existence of a greater power: an Übergott), or God would set/create the pattern.
> > > >> The author states in the beginning lines that he IS the pattern.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I also think that the author meant to say that God set the pattern for *unity* in earth. "Union," especially in conjunction with "acts," seems to imply that God copulates with earth in a ritualistic manner (role-playing?).. However, based on the remainder of the poem, this may well have been the author's intent.
> > > >> According to the lines, there is nothing out there but the Earth. What about all of the other solar systems that the James Webb Space Telescope is imaging? Is God busy with a pattern for those too, or is He using the master pattern that He created of the author?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > When he marries, he is husband and spouse,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Um... a husband *is* a spouse. I think that the poet means to say "husband and wife" (perhaps he's unaware that "spouse" is gender neutral?).
> > > >> Maybe He is one of the people who marry themselves? Not sure how you would divorce yourself, though. Also, the "he's" should be "He's."
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Birth his great mystery, creation of life,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The poet seems to naturally fall into run-on sentences comprising thought strings -- nowhere near as bad as our resident Donkey's strings of thought fragments -- but, as editor, you should replace the commas after "mystery" and "life" with a semicolon and a period, respectively.
> > > >> The "his" should be "His."
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > So while he acts as our father and mother,
> > > >> > > All along we knew him as our lover.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The above passages is disturbingly incestuous (Pickles would have approved) and blasphemous (earning it Pendragon's seal of approval).
> > > >> In this line, "him" should be "Him." Yes, Pickles would be delighted.
> > > >>
> > > >> Since this is supposed to be a part of the "Parousia Christian Poetry Chapbook" series, we are surprised that Mr. Reiff was not more careful with his religious grammar and punctuation. When we read the poem, we thought that he did not go back and revise it, let alone proofread it. The poem has a careless feel.
> > > >
> > > > George Dance, George Sulzbach pissed xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > What happened to you pretending not to read Zod's posts?
> > >
> > > Bullshit much, Nancy Gene?
> > No
> I didn't expect you to admit it, Pendragon, you shit slinging little monkey.
>
> HTH and HAND.

Michael Pendragon wrote:

> George Dance wrote:
>
>> > > >> > > Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
>> > > >> > > Pattern, by AE Reiff
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > If I a pattern of the universe divine,
>> > > >> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
>> > > >> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
>> > > >> > > [...]
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html

<...>

> NOTE TO GEORGE DANCE:

> Our resident troll

I haven't seen Dink on this thread yet...

On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>
> Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
> Pattern, by AE Reiff
>
> If I a pattern of the universe divine,
> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
> [...]
>
> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html

Here's the poem, Pendragon, if you don't like my comments, simply skip and ignore.

HTH and HAND.

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 6:31:21 PM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
> Michael Pendragon wrote:
>
> > George Dance wrote:
> >
> >> > > >> > > Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
> >> > > >> > > Pattern, by AE Reiff
> >> > > >> > >
> >> > > >> > > If I a pattern of the universe divine,
> >> > > >> > > See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> >> > > >> > > Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
> >> > > >> > > [...]
> >> > > >> > >
> >> > > >> > > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
> <...>
> > NOTE TO GEORGE DANCE:
>
> > Our resident troll
> I haven't seen Dink on this thread yet...

It's okay Georgie Porgie, I know you and the Donkey just lurve me so much, but I got fed up with the bullshit from both of you. I have at LEAST fifty threads marked as 'spam' in Google, and guess what? Some of those are yours or because of you. I know the two of you -- TweedleTroll & TweedleTrolling -- always ask where I'm at when I do not post for awhile, since the idea of a life outside of AAPC and Usenet escapes you like air rushing out of a punctured balloon, BUT do not worry. You and your Master seem to keep good enough company for the two of you. Now phuck off and die in a fire, you unwashed umbillical cord.

On 2022-08-16 5:54 a.m., NancyGene wrote:
> On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 9:24:57 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
>> On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:54:32 PM UTC, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>> Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
>>>> Pattern, by AE Reiff
>>>>
>>>> If I a pattern of the universe divine,
>>>> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
>>>> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
>> We wish to point out that George Dance states (on his blog) that this poem is from "The True Light That Lights." It is not included in Mr. Reiff's chapbook (23 pages) by that name.
>>> Pattern

No; I've been too busy to reply, but I read that on Monday, verified
your claim, and removed the credit line. So at least I can thank you for
that.

>>>> If I[,] a pattern of the universe divine,
>>>
>>> if the speaker is "a pattern of the universe," one assume he is referring to his molecular structure (i.e., a quasi-scientific perception), but he follows this with an anachronistically inverted "divine" (without the capital "D" to make it even more confusing. The sentiment appears to be a New Agey take on Pantheism wherein atoms, molecules, strings, etc., are part of humankind and the universe they inhabit. All is One/all are united in a single consciousness which, for want of a better word, we term "God."

>> We assumed too that the author left out "am" in the first line. However, it is still a murky statement, since is he a pattern "for" the universe, meaning that everything is copied from him and he is the original? Or, does he mean that he is cut from the original pattern of the universe? Or, maybe he just needs a comma after "I?"

He isn't saying that. All the line says is:
"If I divine a pattern of the universe ..."

He is not calling himself "a pattern of the Divine universe", and not
even calling it the "Divine universe" (though that's an acceptable
ambiguity) -- therefore, there should be no comma after the "I".

>>> This is basically what I believe, but I like to think that I can express it in a clearer fashion.
>>>> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
>>> Isn't most light luminous by definition?
>> We think that the author really means stars and "planets." Sloppy, sloppy of the author and the editor.

No, he does not mean "stars" and "planets".

Of course you can't be expected to know, but FWIW the star/plant
connection is a central image in his writing, and (considering the
sentence) looks like the 'pattern' he's divined and is pondering on
here. It's central to his poetry, and important there, and if you make
that one oh-so-obvious choice to change it to the better-scanning
"planets", you lose it completely.

That's two examples, in two lines, of how one innocuous little change by
an editor can completely fuck up a line and with it the whole poem. The
lesson should be that an editor should beware of tampering with someone
else's poem.

>>>> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind,
>>>
>>> Does the speaker hear the wind's song thundering in his heart and mind, or does he hear the wind's song *and* thunder in heart and mind? If the former, he needs to delete the comma. If the latter, he needs to replace the comma with a semicolon.
>> Maybe he hears the wind's song and then "he" thunders in his heart and mind?

Option 2: he hears the windsong and the thunder. It's not option 1 (he
hears the windsong thundering) because of the comma, which tells you
there's two events. And it's not a semicolon, because that would
separate them into discrete events, and they're meant to be happening
simultaneously.

Logically, he's thinking of real wind and thunder, but they do
double-duty as metaphors. The speaker's trying to describe the
overpowering effect of this epiphany he's had from divining the pattern,
by comparing it to sensory overload. He has not just ordinary light but
some extra-strong "luminous light" blinding him, and not just windsong
or thunder, but windsong and thunder together blasting and deafening him.

At least that's how I'd interpret that line-and-a-half.

>>>> That these portend symbols of universal might,
>>>
>>> His run-on sentence loses coherence as it progresses. Does the thunder in his heart portend [sic] symbols of universal might? Or do the stars' luminosity and the wind's song portend[sic] universal might? And why should universal might trigger warnings of calamity or ill omens?"
>> We think that Mr. Reiff was trying (and failing) to write something profound.

He realizes there's a "might" that's "universal," and that all of this -
the pattern, the divination, the light, the windsong, the thunder - is
symbolic of that "might". IOW, that everything is connected, and
everything is a manifestation of omnipresent force. You can't get more
profound than that in mysticism; that *is* the mystical experience in a
nutshell.

There are definitely changes I'd make if it were my poem, but I've the
poem quite understandable and likeable so far.

>>>
>>>> Then I consider first their means of union,
>>>
>>> I think that the meaning of this run-on monstrosity is something along the following lines: When I am dwarfed by the vastness of the universe, and the wind's song stirs the thunder in my soul, I remind myself everything I see is intricately connected in the Divine tapestry of creation.
>> Or, maybe that he is a McCall's dress pattern?
>>>
>>> Or, as Don McLean put it:
>>>
>>> "Every dawn that breaks golden is held in suspension
>>> Like the yoke of the egg in albumen.
>>> Where the birth and the death of unseen generations
>>> Are interdependent in vast orchestration
>>> And painted in colors of tapestry thread
>>> When the dying are born and the living are dead."
>>>

Same endpoint, the Divine, but by a completely different path. McLean
doesn't say the same thing as Reiff but better, he's saying something
else very well.

>>>> The balance of beauty with power and force,
>>>> What adherence!
>>>

>>> A commercial for Krazy Glue?
>> Cut on the lines and baste before you sew. ("Measure twice, cut once.")

OMG! If all you guys want to do from here on down is snicker about silly
puns, like that yob that Oscar Wilde had to deal with, then it's time
for me to sign off.

The sun's come up, and Don Mclean made me want to have a egg for breakfast.

snip

On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 7:20:59 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-08-16 5:54 a.m., NancyGene wrote:
> > On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 9:24:57 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
> >> On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:54:32 PM UTC, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>>> Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
> >>>> Pattern, by AE Reiff
> >>>>
> >>>> If I a pattern of the universe divine,
> >>>> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> >>>> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>
> >>>> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
> >> We wish to point out that George Dance states (on his blog) that this poem is from "The True Light That Lights." It is not included in Mr. Reiff's chapbook (23 pages) by that name.
> >>> Pattern
> No; I've been too busy to reply, but I read that on Monday, verified
> your claim, and removed the credit line. So at least I can thank you for
> that.
> >>>> If I[,] a pattern of the universe divine,
> >>>
> >>> if the speaker is "a pattern of the universe," one assume he is referring to his molecular structure (i.e., a quasi-scientific perception), but he follows this with an anachronistically inverted "divine" (without the capital "D" to make it even more confusing. The sentiment appears to be a New Agey take on Pantheism wherein atoms, molecules, strings, etc., are part of humankind and the universe they inhabit. All is One/all are united in a single consciousness which, for want of a better word, we term "God."
>
> >> We assumed too that the author left out "am" in the first line. However, it is still a murky statement, since is he a pattern "for" the universe, meaning that everything is copied from him and he is the original? Or, does he mean that he is cut from the original pattern of the universe? Or, maybe he just needs a comma after "I?"
> He isn't saying that. All the line says is:
> "If I divine a pattern of the universe ..."
>
> He is not calling himself "a pattern of the Divine universe", and not
> even calling it the "Divine universe" (though that's an acceptable
> ambiguity) -- therefore, there should be no comma after the "I".
> >>> This is basically what I believe, but I like to think that I can express it in a clearer fashion.
> >>>> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
> >>> Isn't most light luminous by definition?
> >> We think that the author really means stars and "planets." Sloppy, sloppy of the author and the editor.
> No, he does not mean "stars" and "planets".
>
> Of course you can't be expected to know, but FWIW the star/plant
> connection is a central image in his writing, and (considering the
> sentence) looks like the 'pattern' he's divined and is pondering on
> here. It's central to his poetry, and important there, and if you make
> that one oh-so-obvious choice to change it to the better-scanning
> "planets", you lose it completely.
>
> That's two examples, in two lines, of how one innocuous little change by
> an editor can completely fuck up a line and with it the whole poem. The
> lesson should be that an editor should beware of tampering with someone
> else's poem.

Exactly what was decided about updating and correcting the poetry of Edmond Spenser, actually.

> >>>> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind,
> >>>
> >>> Does the speaker hear the wind's song thundering in his heart and mind, or does he hear the wind's song *and* thunder in heart and mind? If the former, he needs to delete the comma. If the latter, he needs to replace the comma with a semicolon.
> >> Maybe he hears the wind's song and then "he" thunders in his heart and mind?
> Option 2: he hears the windsong and the thunder. It's not option 1 (he
> hears the windsong thundering) because of the comma, which tells you
> there's two events. And it's not a semicolon, because that would
> separate them into discrete events, and they're meant to be happening
> simultaneously.
>
> Logically, he's thinking of real wind and thunder, but they do
> double-duty as metaphors. The speaker's trying to describe the
> overpowering effect of this epiphany he's had from divining the pattern,
> by comparing it to sensory overload. He has not just ordinary light but
> some extra-strong "luminous light" blinding him, and not just windsong
> or thunder, but windsong and thunder together blasting and deafening him.
>
> At least that's how I'd interpret that line-and-a-half.
> >>>> That these portend symbols of universal might,
> >>>
> >>> His run-on sentence loses coherence as it progresses. Does the thunder in his heart portend [sic] symbols of universal might? Or do the stars' luminosity and the wind's song portend[sic] universal might? And why should universal might trigger warnings of calamity or ill omens?"
> >> We think that Mr. Reiff was trying (and failing) to write something profound.
> He realizes there's a "might" that's "universal," and that all of this -
> the pattern, the divination, the light, the windsong, the thunder - is
> symbolic of that "might". IOW, that everything is connected, and
> everything is a manifestation of omnipresent force. You can't get more
> profound than that in mysticism; that *is* the mystical experience in a
> nutshell.
>
> There are definitely changes I'd make if it were my poem, but I've the
> poem quite understandable and likeable so far.
> >>>
> >>>> Then I consider first their means of union,
> >>>
> >>> I think that the meaning of this run-on monstrosity is something along the following lines: When I am dwarfed by the vastness of the universe, and the wind's song stirs the thunder in my soul, I remind myself everything I see is intricately connected in the Divine tapestry of creation.
> >> Or, maybe that he is a McCall's dress pattern?
> >>>
> >>> Or, as Don McLean put it:
> >>>
> >>> "Every dawn that breaks golden is held in suspension
> >>> Like the yoke of the egg in albumen.
> >>> Where the birth and the death of unseen generations
> >>> Are interdependent in vast orchestration
> >>> And painted in colors of tapestry thread
> >>> When the dying are born and the living are dead."
> >>>
> Same endpoint, the Divine, but by a completely different path. McLean
> doesn't say the same thing as Reiff but better, he's saying something
> else very well.
> >>>> The balance of beauty with power and force,
> >>>> What adherence!
> >>>
>
> >>> A commercial for Krazy Glue?
> >> Cut on the lines and baste before you sew. ("Measure twice, cut once.")
> OMG! If all you guys want to do from here on down is snicker about silly
> puns, like that yob that Oscar Wilde had to deal with, then it's time
> for me to sign off.
>
> The sun's come up, and Don Mclean made me want to have a egg for breakfast.
>
> snip

....

George J. Dance wrote:

> On 2022-08-16 5:54 a.m., NancyGene wrote:
>> On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 9:24:57 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
>>> On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:54:32 PM UTC, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>>> Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
>>>>> Pattern, by AE Reiff
>>>>>
>>>>> If I a pattern of the universe divine,
>>>>> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
>>>>> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
>>> We wish to point out that George Dance states (on his blog) that this poem is from "The True Light That Lights." It is not included in Mr. Reiff's chapbook (23 pages) by that name.
>>>> Pattern

> No; I've been too busy to reply, but I read that on Monday, verified
> your claim, and removed the credit line. So at least I can thank you for
> that.

>>>>> If I[,] a pattern of the universe divine,
>>>>
>>>> if the speaker is "a pattern of the universe," one assume he is referring to his molecular structure (i.e., a quasi-scientific perception), but he follows this with an anachronistically inverted "divine" (without the capital "D" to make it even more confusing. The sentiment appears to be a New Agey take on Pantheism wherein atoms, molecules, strings, etc., are part of humankind and the universe they inhabit. All is One/all are united in a single consciousness which, for want of a better word, we term "God."

>>> We assumed too that the author left out "am" in the first line. However, it is still a murky statement, since is he a pattern "for" the universe, meaning that everything is copied from him and he is the original? Or, does he mean that he is cut from the original pattern of the universe? Or, maybe he just needs a comma after "I?"

> He isn't saying that. All the line says is:
> "If I divine a pattern of the universe ..."

> He is not calling himself "a pattern of the Divine universe", and not
> even calling it the "Divine universe" (though that's an acceptable
> ambiguity) -- therefore, there should be no comma after the "I".

>>>> This is basically what I believe, but I like to think that I can express it in a clearer fashion.
>>>>> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
>>>> Isn't most light luminous by definition?
>>> We think that the author really means stars and "planets." Sloppy, sloppy of the author and the editor.

> No, he does not mean "stars" and "planets".

> Of course you can't be expected to know, but FWIW the star/plant
> connection is a central image in his writing, and (considering the
> sentence) looks like the 'pattern' he's divined and is pondering on
> here. It's central to his poetry, and important there, and if you make
> that one oh-so-obvious choice to change it to the better-scanning
> "planets", you lose it completely.

> That's two examples, in two lines, of how one innocuous little change by
> an editor can completely fuck up a line and with it the whole poem. The
> lesson should be that an editor should beware of tampering with someone
> else's poem.

>>>>> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind,
>>>>
>>>> Does the speaker hear the wind's song thundering in his heart and mind, or does he hear the wind's song *and* thunder in heart and mind? If the former, he needs to delete the comma. If the latter, he needs to replace the comma with a semicolon.
>>> Maybe he hears the wind's song and then "he" thunders in his heart and mind?

> Option 2: he hears the windsong and the thunder. It's not option 1 (he
> hears the windsong thundering) because of the comma, which tells you
> there's two events. And it's not a semicolon, because that would
> separate them into discrete events, and they're meant to be happening
> simultaneously.

> Logically, he's thinking of real wind and thunder, but they do
> double-duty as metaphors. The speaker's trying to describe the
> overpowering effect of this epiphany he's had from divining the pattern,
> by comparing it to sensory overload. He has not just ordinary light but
> some extra-strong "luminous light" blinding him, and not just windsong
> or thunder, but windsong and thunder together blasting and deafening him.

> At least that's how I'd interpret that line-and-a-half.

>>>>> That these portend symbols of universal might,
>>>>
>>>> His run-on sentence loses coherence as it progresses. Does the thunder in his heart portend [sic] symbols of universal might? Or do the stars' luminosity and the wind's song portend[sic] universal might? And why should universal might trigger warnings of calamity or ill omens?"
>>> We think that Mr. Reiff was trying (and failing) to write something profound.

> He realizes there's a "might" that's "universal," and that all of this -
> the pattern, the divination, the light, the windsong, the thunder - is
> symbolic of that "might". IOW, that everything is connected, and
> everything is a manifestation of omnipresent force. You can't get more
> profound than that in mysticism; that *is* the mystical experience in a
> nutshell.

> There are definitely changes I'd make if it were my poem, but I've the
> poem quite understandable and likeable so far.

>>>>
>>>>> Then I consider first their means of union,
>>>>
>>>> I think that the meaning of this run-on monstrosity is something along the following lines: When I am dwarfed by the vastness of the universe, and the wind's song stirs the thunder in my soul, I remind myself everything I see is intricately connected in the Divine tapestry of creation.
>>> Or, maybe that he is a McCall's dress pattern?
>>>>
>>>> Or, as Don McLean put it:
>>>>
>>>> "Every dawn that breaks golden is held in suspension
>>>> Like the yoke of the egg in albumen.
>>>> Where the birth and the death of unseen generations
>>>> Are interdependent in vast orchestration
>>>> And painted in colors of tapestry thread
>>>> When the dying are born and the living are dead."
>>>>

> Same endpoint, the Divine, but by a completely different path. McLean
> doesn't say the same thing as Reiff but better, he's saying something
> else very well.

>>>>> The balance of beauty with power and force,
>>>>> What adherence!
>>>>

>>>> A commercial for Krazy Glue?
>>> Cut on the lines and baste before you sew. ("Measure twice, cut once.")

> OMG! If all you guys want to do from here on down is snicker about silly
> puns, like that yob that Oscar Wilde had to deal with, then it's time
> for me to sign off.

Well put.

> The sun's come up, and Don Mclean made me want to have a egg for breakfast.

> snip

Zod wrote:

> George J. Dance wrote:

>> On 2022-08-16 5:54 a.m., NancyGene wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 15, 2022 at 9:24:57 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 11:54:32 PM UTC, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 12:32:08 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>>>> Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
>>>>>> Pattern, by AE Reiff
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I a pattern of the universe divine,
>>>>>> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
>>>>>> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/08/pattern-ae-reiff.html
>>>> We wish to point out that George Dance states (on his blog) that this poem is from "The True Light That Lights." It is not included in Mr. Reiff's chapbook (23 pages) by that name.
>>>>> Pattern

>> No; I've been too busy to reply, but I read that on Monday, verified
>> your claim, and removed the credit line. So at least I can thank you for
>> that.

>>>>>> If I[,] a pattern of the universe divine,
>>>>>
>>>>> if the speaker is "a pattern of the universe," one assume he is referring to his molecular structure (i.e., a quasi-scientific perception), but he follows this with an anachronistically inverted "divine" (without the capital "D" to make it even more confusing. The sentiment appears to be a New Agey take on Pantheism wherein atoms, molecules, strings, etc., are part of humankind and the universe they inhabit. All is One/all are united in a single consciousness which, for want of a better word, we term "God."

>>>> We assumed too that the author left out "am" in the first line. However, it is still a murky statement, since is he a pattern "for" the universe, meaning that everything is copied from him and he is the original? Or, does he mean that he is cut from the original pattern of the universe? Or, maybe he just needs a comma after "I?"

>> He isn't saying that. All the line says is:
>> "If I divine a pattern of the universe ..."

>> He is not calling himself "a pattern of the Divine universe", and not
>> even calling it the "Divine universe" (though that's an acceptable
>> ambiguity) -- therefore, there should be no comma after the "I".

>>>>> This is basically what I believe, but I like to think that I can express it in a clearer fashion.
>>>>>> See stars and plants joined in luminous light,
>>>>> Isn't most light luminous by definition?
>>>> We think that the author really means stars and "planets." Sloppy, sloppy of the author and the editor.

>> No, he does not mean "stars" and "planets".

>> Of course you can't be expected to know, but FWIW the star/plant
>> connection is a central image in his writing, and (considering the
>> sentence) looks like the 'pattern' he's divined and is pondering on
>> here. It's central to his poetry, and important there, and if you make
>> that one oh-so-obvious choice to change it to the better-scanning
>> "planets", you lose it completely.

>> That's two examples, in two lines, of how one innocuous little change by
>> an editor can completely fuck up a line and with it the whole poem. The
>> lesson should be that an editor should beware of tampering with someone
>> else's poem.

>>>>>> Hear the wind’s song, thunder in heart and mind,
>>>>>
>>>>> Does the speaker hear the wind's song thundering in his heart and mind, or does he hear the wind's song *and* thunder in heart and mind? If the former, he needs to delete the comma. If the latter, he needs to replace the comma with a semicolon.
>>>> Maybe he hears the wind's song and then "he" thunders in his heart and mind?

>> Option 2: he hears the windsong and the thunder. It's not option 1 (he
>> hears the windsong thundering) because of the comma, which tells you
>> there's two events. And it's not a semicolon, because that would
>> separate them into discrete events, and they're meant to be happening
>> simultaneously.

>> Logically, he's thinking of real wind and thunder, but they do
>> double-duty as metaphors. The speaker's trying to describe the
>> overpowering effect of this epiphany he's had from divining the pattern,
>> by comparing it to sensory overload. He has not just ordinary light but
>> some extra-strong "luminous light" blinding him, and not just windsong
>> or thunder, but windsong and thunder together blasting and deafening him.

>> At least that's how I'd interpret that line-and-a-half.

>>>>>> That these portend symbols of universal might,
>>>>>
>>>>> His run-on sentence loses coherence as it progresses. Does the thunder in his heart portend [sic] symbols of universal might? Or do the stars' luminosity and the wind's song portend[sic] universal might? And why should universal might trigger warnings of calamity or ill omens?"
>>>> We think that Mr. Reiff was trying (and failing) to write something profound.

>> He realizes there's a "might" that's "universal," and that all of this -
>> the pattern, the divination, the light, the windsong, the thunder - is
>> symbolic of that "might". IOW, that everything is connected, and
>> everything is a manifestation of omnipresent force. You can't get more
>> profound than that in mysticism; that *is* the mystical experience in a
>> nutshell.

>> There are definitely changes I'd make if it were my poem, but I've the
>> poem quite understandable and likeable so far.

>>>>>
>>>>>> Then I consider first their means of union,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that the meaning of this run-on monstrosity is something along the following lines: When I am dwarfed by the vastness of the universe, and the wind's song stirs the thunder in my soul, I remind myself everything I see is intricately connected in the Divine tapestry of creation.
>>>> Or, maybe that he is a McCall's dress pattern?
>>>>>
>>>>> Or, as Don McLean put it:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Every dawn that breaks golden is held in suspension
>>>>> Like the yoke of the egg in albumen.
>>>>> Where the birth and the death of unseen generations
>>>>> Are interdependent in vast orchestration
>>>>> And painted in colors of tapestry thread
>>>>> When the dying are born and the living are dead."
>>>>>

>> Same endpoint, the Divine, but by a completely different path. McLean
>> doesn't say the same thing as Reiff but better, he's saying something
>> else very well.

>>>>>> The balance of beauty with power and force,
>>>>>> What adherence!
>>>>>

>>>>> A commercial for Krazy Glue?
>>>> Cut on the lines and baste before you sew. ("Measure twice, cut once.")

>> OMG! If all you guys want to do from here on down is snicker about silly
>> puns, like that yob that Oscar Wilde had to deal with, then it's time
>> for me to sign off.

> Well put.

>> The sun's come up, and Don Mclean made me want to have a egg for breakfast.

>> snip

Agreed.